resopalrabotnick

well, those jackets are meant to let you skid to a stop from 150 miles without wearing through. that's why it doesn't look completely destroyed. there is one video of a motogp driver getting thrown at the end of the front straight, close to 180 mph. he ended up shifting his weight around because he felt hot spots on his leathers and on his thighs all that was left was the firesuit underneath. the leather was completely gone.

well, if you're a speed freak price is no issue. for the use you put it to, i think 5 is fine, unless the number of software downloads increases. (bear in mind however that most sites will not even serve up the 5 mbit to each connection much less the 10)

i vote we keep ca3le off bikes in the future. we can't afford to lose him like this again.

if you'd learned to type with your nose or a stick in your mouth it woulkda been done a long time ago...

good to see you back!

i agree that if everyone wants music for free it will turn worse. pandora does some advertising on the webpage or you can subscribe to the service to be able to use standalone players. they have contracts with the labels that let you pick songs not directly but by genre/style. so you get the sound you want without always getting the band you want. even at my young age i find the state of modern music deplorable, maybe because i spent most of elementary school listening to a classic rock station on the radio. that doesn't let me appreciate the modern pop stuff very well. one can only hope that the verdict opens some eyes, makes some parents take more of an interest in what their kids do online (money can be such a good motivator...) and maybe gives society back a bit of the moral fiber that it has lost. if noone frowns on theft like filesharing it is no wonder other crimes are commited without a second thought.

hear about the 220000 dollar fine? anyhow, if you completely block outbound traffic you won't get inbound traffic as your comp has to acknoledge receipt of inbound traffic.

rotflmbfhao while i started reading the site "You Can't Always Get What You Want" by the rolling stones started playing on pandora.

roco, the question isn't even if talent is worth money. look at some of the stuff that is raking in the big bucks. the question is, will someone be willing to pay for it. and apparently there are still enough honest folks out there that don;t mind paying what the labels want to let them hold their prices. i for one don't want to pay. i have a few cds left (but admittedly don't listen to them anymore) and use free music sites like pandora for my fix of music.

and what irks me is all the people trying to sugarcoat what she did. she stole. plain and simple. she then decided to contest the charge and lost. now she is stuck with a 220000 dollar fine and a big legal bill. will the "community" of "filesharers" support this "poor victim" of "record company fashism"? i doubt it. they are too cheap to even pay for their music.

now i get you mudmanc4, and i think you are saying something like rtb, why should she be responsible for the copies others make of the copies she uploads? first off, because the judge and jury decided she was. secondly i think she should be held liable because she is enabling those that downloaded from her to upload to others, kinda like she is sitting on the top of a pyramid of piracy. you'll proably say that those that uploaded her copy would have uploaded the same song even if they hadn't gotten it from her because they would have downloaded it from someone else. but the fact remains that she /did/ make the songs available for download and thereby assisted in the distribution of stolen material. as to the armload of cd's being physically stolen not making the news, well, an armload or even a couple boxes of cds ripped off from the back of a truck isn't worth all that much. and they can only be sold once, unlike the copied file which keeps on spreading.

i have to say you have completely lost me in that paragraph. it could be i need to head to bed but i don't get where you are coming from or where you're going with the argument.

i disagree. but i see your opinion as valid. as you say, the technology has something to do with it. back in the day you needed to dupe every single tape by hand. the music companies could figure that for every copy sold the song would get x number of copies. and that number i would place as somewhere around 4 or 5. and of those copies of one song one or two might even entice someone to buy the whole album. added to this is the fact that all those copies were analog. hence lossy. nowadays a pimply faced kid can throw a rip of the latest album out there as a torrent and a week later the whole world has a perfect bit for bit copy. to me, that is a significant difference.

misquote there. if you shell out the dough you're safe. if you steal you get buggered. and the big difference, like momma t said is that back in the day you would share some songs with some friends. i remember the law in germany actually being that you could make copies that way as long as you didn't charge for them. the problem is that with filesharing you get hold of a copy or original, mark it as shared on your comp and leave the box running overnight on a broadband link and everyone and their sister can copy it from you, you don't have to know them or do anything for them. and that is what leads to the uncontrolled sharing that does real financial damage.

tommie. i'm not saying you aren't right. but put yourself in the cops boots. do you want to have to live with yourself of making a life and death call? do you want to pull the trigger and have to defend it before the most critical and aggressive court in the world, your own conscience? today i saw a serviceman in fatigues in the store. i walked up to him, shook his hand and said thank you. he immediately understood. his neutral face turned into a big smile and he said you're welcome. i can not tell you how good that felt. why am i putting this in this thread? because there are those among us that stand on the front lines, be it on a faraway shore or in our neighborhoods, making sure that we have the freedom to express ourselves. the freedom to rant about the government, the RIAA, the MPAA and whatever else happens to put a burr up our asses. honor those men and women, show them your appreciation. and think about what their dreams may hold in store for them if they have to make the most final of decisions.

if you stop persecuting theft and drugs, what is there left? babyrape? ultimately, all crime is theft. be it the theft of life, the theft of health, the theft of money, the theft of time or the theft of items. and why not attack a mother of two. just because britney spears is a mother of two means she should ge away with drug abuse, dui etc.?

i know they were not simple thieves. but even in those countries (looks like south america to me) there is such a thing as due process. and while the steps that lead to the use of deadly force may be different they are a mere last resort. my sequence was: - stop, bundeswehr - stop bundeswehr or i will use deadly force. - stop bundeswehr or i will use deadly force. warning shot, repeat if confronting group or crowd - open fire. that scenario gave me a lot to think about. any good person that is forced to act like those officers did will have a guilty conscience for the rest of their lives. they will be asking themselves if they did the right thing again and again.

i agree with roco. the price of an album or dvd is set by the consumer. if enough albums sell for x dollars then the price is ok. simple economics. as for the amount she is being sued for: she got caught. deal with it. stealing the music for her own use is bad enough but she offered it to others to download it from her. that is why the sum is so high. and the "but someone hacked my wireless internet...." defense: tough. you set up a hotspot, you have to make sure noone else can use it. otherwise you are giving access to your connection to others. ignorance does not absolve thee of responsibility. if you buy a dangerous device and leave it sitting in the yard for everyone to use you are also liable.

thank god i have never been in a similar position. but i have received training in the military as to how to guard bases in peacetime. and some of that instruction included scenarios in which i as the guar on scene would ave had to make the life and death decision on wether or not to use deadly force. oh, sure, you can say you were just following orders. but i am sur that a lot of the officers pictured in the clip amd others in similar situations have to go through a lot of counseling to stop the nightmares. to this day i am not sure wether or not i would have pulled the trigger in certain situations. to save a comrades' life, probably. but just to protect valuable equipment from sabotage? probably would have fallen back on training and done it, but the thought of the dreams afterwards... anyway. justice is served by a fair trial. what happened in the clips was maybe just, but it wasn't really justice dealt out according to the laws. it was justice dealt out accidentally, forced on the officers in the situation to protect innocent lives by taking the lives of those that threaten it. i'm stopping here. maybe go on later.

looks like you're building a cabin...

from what i gather it is a file that when you decompress it it becomes gargantuan, taking up a ginourmous chunk of disk.

that's a tough one. let me think it over.

for best conflict solver i nominate momma t. best mod goes to shug. he has a decent sense of humor and doesn't come down on people messing threads about too hard. as for messing threads about roco gets my vote for best derailer. swimmer and php share my nomination for best software advice. hardware advice is too diverse to call.

oh sympathy hell. he has hydraulic splitters. i remember having to use sledgehammers and wedges to split the oak logs the chainsaw would falter on.